ArticleScientific reports2025
Acoustic impedance inversion via voting stacked regression (VStaR) algorithms.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In this study, we focused on improving acoustic impedance (AI) in seismic exploration. AI is a crucial parameter estimated by multiplying the density of a material by the velocity of an acoustic wave passing through it. A low AI in sandstones and carbonates often indicates high porosity, which enhances hydrocarbon accumulation. Accurate AI estimation is thus critical for reliable hydrocarbon exploration. To refine the AI estimation, we used stacking and voting regression algorithms, with depth, two-way travel time (TWTT), and nine seismic attributes as inputs. All models were implemented using scikit-learn . The VStaR model achieved superior predictive performance ([Formula: see text]= 0.9973) and yielded a more accurate fitting parameter (a = 0.1584) in the acoustic impedance-porosity transformation compared to the VSR ([Formula: see text]= 0.9775, a = 0.1583). The VSR approach made the voting of a top-performing base model with two less predictive base models, as used in the existing literature. Relative to the true and BLIMP-derived impedance, the fitting accuracy followed the order of true > VStaR > VSR > BLIMP. While VStaR required longer computation time (≈ 400 s), it reduced RMSE by 14.74% compared to the top-performing base model. VStaR outperformed all evaluated models based on MSE, RMSE, and [Formula: see text] metrics. The novelty of the VStaR method based on hyperparameters lies in its superior performance in obtaining a more precise prediction of acoustic impedance compared to the VSR and conventional BLIMP method, potentially improving the effectiveness of hydrocarbon exploration in Illam carbonate dataset.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.